Announcements and Updates

New additions to website as of June 26:  A handout from Howie Phanstiel, Ibrahim Gambari's speech, Sue Hiesler's (Lockheed Martin) power point presentation, Michael Meath's Working with the Media power point presentation, and Rosemary O'Leary's Creativity power point presentation.

GREATEST HITS FROM DIVERSITY DISCUSSIONS have been added at the bottom of this page.

INTERESTED TO SEE HOW YOUR CLASSMATES RESOLVED THE FARM LAND NEGOTIATION?  SCROLL TO THE END OF THIS PAGE TO FIND OUT. 

GREATEST HITS FROM DIVERSITY DISCUSSIONS

Group: Chris Mulkins, Dan, Nikki Hunter, Mim Mirsky, Isabel Beltran, Daniel, Matt Norton, Diego Tisera, Hemant, Rosemary Mosquea, Steph Hutchinson, Kara Noto, Liz Dennison, Jeff Cady, Sephora Dandurand, Diana Keller, Surobhi, Jess T.   

1. Being aware of diversity is important because it opens up one’s perspectives, illuminating non-traditional definitions of country, regional, sexual diversity. It also reduces the cost of not having a diverse workforce.
2. Diversity management should be aware of the societal, or culturally imbedded stereotypes and the institutional, or legal hurdles, of discrimination and exclusion. This can be achieved through cultural awareness systems that seek to build links to other groups outside one’s comfort zone.
3. Training regarding diversity include initial, upon employment trainings and additional trainings for management. The former are minimalistic, uneffective, mandatory and less well-received by employees. The latter, which could be more cultural, can be more eye-opening, addressing contentious debates such as the need for information for decision-making and employee privacy.
4. Best practices include a) incorporating diversity into the mission statement; b) leadership commitment to diversity; c) representation of diversity throughout management positions; d) diversity performance and accountability measurement system which incorporates a two-way system between management and employees. Positive trainings will expand beyond initial learning points and will use creative methods and practices (including a potluck). Additionally, an alternative system that incorporated an individual outside of management to handle grievances will be useful. Employee involvement in all of these practices is key as well.
5. To measure the impact of these practices and systems, we would use evaluations, accountability measurement techniques and the ability to use the force of law.

Group:  Jenny Dickinson, Emily Coronado, Colin Seale, Rob Alexander, Krista Lampe, Rosalyn Bandy 

1. Interpersonal issues include work ethic, communications, for example sensitivity and productivity
2. Tokenism. We do not want to tokenize the training either. There should be a balance between preserving identity and being part of larger movement. Sometimes you are asked to represent a certain community and you don’t want to.
3. We are all going to make these mistakes, we need to know when we are getting into trouble. It is not simple, it is systematic and we shouldn’t take it too personal. Framing the training process is very important.
4. Continuous education that is specific, concrete, ongoing; training that includes genuine efforts to teach one another; space for affinity groups, determine appropriateness; clear policy and practice for addressing problems; a statement of values; have a manager publicly call themselves out when they do something wrong; encourage expression of discomfort; attempt to “pre-treat” (do training before issues arise)

Group:  Jen, Patrick, Rob, Jackie, Matt, Duden, and Eric

 This group had some great ideas concerning best practices. They specifically talked about the need to develop a culture accepting of all parties that stresses the importance of diversity and where all individuals are understood to be bringing something to the table through their diverse backgrounds and experiences.

Not only did they talk about the importance of such a culture, but they came up with ways to promote such ideals within an institution. Ideas discussed were the use of non normative, inclusive language within the institution, having diversity management skills as a part of performance evaluations, having the institutional commitment to diversity in writing, such as in a mission statement, and ensuring buy in from upper management.

These best practices were aimed at avoiding a “surface” approach to diversity which would not really create a “culture” of diversity within the institution.

Group:  Tina, Michelle, Byron, Michael, Olga, Spencer, Sandra, D.J. Brenna, Jana, Sarah.

This group mentioned some very specific points which were particularly interesting. They mentioned, for example, that there must not only be a written policy regarding diversity, but specific PRACTICE and that policy must target behavior and NOT beliefs (emphasis in notes).

 This group also specifically noted that there should be efforts to foster, not force, diversity, and that the goal should be to have an open, barrier minimizing, practice towards diversity, as opposed to a perfect cross section of society, which they saw as impossible.

As best practices this group identified language training, diversity programs and trainings, self reflection, and the use of outside consultants.

Santiago Ibarra: Diversity provides organizations with a wider perspective of its environment and possibilities for survival and growth.

Group:  Tess, Theresa, Fredrike, Nidhi, Gretchen

The idea of diversity management is still in its infancy. It wants to be two things at once: it aspires to be a sophisticated version of AA/EEO yet at the same time its suppose to be something different than AA/EEO. In order for diversity management to work, you need to have diversity management/integration in all aspects of society.

An idea - Compare public organizations to private organizations.

Group:  Loveena, Jenn Handog, Sarah Jones, Jessica Tevebaugh, Wenona, Alyce

From the compelling facts from reading question - GLBT issues usually ignored in diversity management.

Success story - Combining two groups regardless of ethnicity and holding diversity workshop on a native american reservation.

Ideas - Have a non-threatening grievance process not tied to job evaluation.

Group: Rebecca, Yoji, Tatsuya, Hua, Recep, Aileen

We had a very diverse group (Chinese, Turkish, American-Mexican, Japanese, Filipino). We shared experiences from our countries and compared them to experiences here in the States and saw different cultural interpretations of how diversity is applied in our places of origin. Some cultures are used to diversity, others are just learning it due to globalization but we all agree that we can learn from each other.

In Japan, "gender" is what diversity is about, not so much race or culture. In the Turkish case, the general approach is human rights, especially in a pluralistic democracy.

The US was a melting pot but has become more of a salad bowl. The goal should be integration, not assimilation.

Best practice - zero tolerance for hate.

FARMLAND NEGOTIATION RESULTS

Group:  Michael Gale, Allison Quigney, Steve Watson, Jennifer Caron

- The row crops, pasture, and houses besides the woodlot would be sold to the developer at a price of $275,000.

- The marsh would be sold to the conservation organization for $100,000.

- Mrs. Agnes will receive a total of $375,000 to apply to her financial needs.

- The woodlot will be donated to the county to be turned into park.

- The conservation organization will manage two trails that go between the new housing development and the river to enhance waterway recreational opportunities for residents.

- The park will be named Agnes McCann Park and will have an arboretum in partnership with the university botany department.

- The developer will pay no property taxes on the land while in development. When the properties are sold to individual owners, they will be responsible for property taxes. In exchange, the developer will pay the differential costs of upgrading the sewer system to handle increased demand and protect the marsh from potential overflow. The developer will also make a corporate donation of $10,000 to the conservation organization.

- Upon completion of the property, the developer will encourage the new home owners association of the property residents to continue working with the county and the conservation organization with future management initiatives.

- The developer will explore opportunities with the LEED (Leaders in Environment and Energy Design) Homes initiative of the U.S. Green Building Council to build more environmentally friendly homes because of the sensitive conservation areas bordering the property.

Group:  Ed Cox and ?

The developer would buy the entire parcel from Agnes for $475,000.  In accordance with her wishes, the marshland and the woodlot would not be developed but would be a wildlife preserve.  The development company would own the land but would allow use by the state college students for envirnmental education.  The house and other buildings will be preserved as county historical landmarks as well as being a feature of the housing development.  In return for concessions by the developer, the county will not access a tax on the marshland or woodlot provided they remain undeveloped.

Group:  Jana Chandler, Hemant Joshi, Ying Zhou, Fredrike Purkert

The farm will be sold jointly to the developer and the conservationist for a total of $450,000. The developer will purchase 70% of the land at a price of $300,000 while the conservationist will purchase the remaining 30% for $150,000. The conservationist is purchasing the land via a ‘conservation easement’ which states that a minimum of 30% of the land will not be developed. As part of the arrangement the marsh will be turned into a park site with specific limitations (boardwalks) and will be managed by the County. The woodlot and farmhouse will also be part of this park, and the farm may be preserved as a historic site. At the urging of the conservationist, the developer has agreed to consider ‘cluster development’ because it saves space for greenery, is cheaper to construct in terms of infrastructure, and builds a sense of community. Cluster development also means that the developer may not need to purchase additional land – which was a concern at the time of the negotiation.

Group:  Santiago, Recep (missed last negotiation), Sarah Byrne, and ?

The final price for the land was $500,000, $400,000 by the developer and $100,000 by the environmental group.
The county would condone charges for changing the use of the land and part of the costs related to the connections of sewage. Property taxes would be left to be paid by homeowners at reasonable rates.
The property would respect the woodlands and the marshes, actually the developer and the environmental group would engage in a joint venture for developing an environmentally friendly complex; the first would pursuit its development business while the environmental group would be in charge of protecting and minting the marshes and woodland.
At least 30% of the property would be left untouched, protecting marshes, woodlands and other green spaces.
 

Group:  Wenona, Krista, Nidhi, Jacque

Problem statement: How to maximize the financial potential for the buyer and seller in a way that minimizes the environmental impact and adds the most value to the community now and in the future.

Resolution: The Conservation Group will purchase the 25-acre marsh, a 2-acre buffer, and the 25-acre homestead and wooded area for $200,000. The group will develop and maintain a wildlife trail in the marsh buffer and transform the house into an education center and headquarters for green tourism. The education center will serve as a satellite campus for a local community college, and the college will continue organic farming and beekeeping practices in the wooded area. The wooded area will also serve as a park for residents of Green Acres.

The Developer will purchase 59 acres of row crops and 74 acres of pasture for $300,000 and a 1 percent share of gross profits for 8 years. The County will provide tax incentives for the Developer to build green rental properties with provisions such as energy-efficient lighting and roof gardening.

The Landowner will establish a chair at the community college and teach beekeeping and organic farming at the education center.

 

Group:  Lisa Chice, Hua Jiang, Tatsuya Oniki, Byron Stewart

The final sales agreement involved dividing the property and selling 50 acres to the Conservation Group for $135,000. The Conservationists purchased the 25 acres of marsh/ wetland, the 25-acre woodlot, and the 5 acres with the garden areas.  The developer purchased the remaining 135 acres for $360,000.  The Conservationist gave verbal assurance that he would be amenable to working with the county to give the public some open/unrestricted access.

Our negotiations began with introductions and an opportunity for each of us to articulate what our desired outcomes were.  The farmer wanted to make a profitable sale so that she could retire in town and provide for her grandchildren.  The developer wanted to buy as much land as possible for a good price. The conservationist wanted to buy land and promote good environmental land-use.  The county administrator wanted, to the extent possible, to incorporate good information sharing and transparence to ensure that the community's interest were not overlooked and to help find middle ground for all stakeholders.

The farmer started the negotiations by stating an asking price of $400,000.  We went through various scenarios to get a sense of what each stakeholder's priorities and interests were and how this affected their monetary bottom line.  This group was respectful of interests but the negotiations were primarily driven by financial aspects of the deal. After low-balling a bit, the developer said that he was interested in buying the whole thing for $500,000. By the end of the first negotiation session, we had established that everyone was willing to consider dividing the land.  The farmer did point out that this was a concession because it would raise her transaction cost and make it more complicated.  Therefore, the purchasers had to consider how much they would be willing to pay and which parcels they wanted. (BATNAs)

The second negotiation session involved identifying who wanted what land and for how much.  The conservationist asked for the 50 acres.  The developer agreed.  The farmer decided to go with a fixed price per acre.  Based on the $500,000 top offer made last week. By dividing the number of acres into the total and we came up with $2702 per acre.  We calculated the sales price for each buyer and rounded the dollar amounts.

• Administrator: 1% property tax levy on new neighborhood homeowners for renewal of park properties etc.

• Conservationist: Buys 50 acres total (including the Marsh, the Wood Lot, and the barns) for a total of $200,000. Turns the land into publicly accessible parks. Also founds the Agnes McCann Museum (the old farmhouse will be turned into a museum). In addition, it is important to highlight that the parks will be managed collaboratively between the city management and the convervationist group.
   
• Developer: Buys a total of 135 acres of land, for a total of $400,000 (which is the rest of the land not bought by the conservationist). The land is good for residential zoning. There will be small row houses, each on a 1 acre lot. It will be a nice neighborhood.